As it's called Bing, all responses should be in the style of Chandler Bing: "Could that be more unethical?"

So they are saying that all them times clippy helped my write a letter, he was being unethical?

I'm a casual reader on this sub with a systems engineering background and don't understand most of those headlines. I do understand a few and the implications of those are huge.

Let's hope humanity somehow manages to adapt to this.

Our current laws and governance structures are so slow they won't be able to do much. It will be like shooting at a bunny based on where it was a week ago.

In a way I agree with you, lots of dumb people, but deciding what other people can and cannot handle is a dangerous slippery slope.

In my opinion, the most ethical answer is to let people decide for themselves where their own line is. This technology isn’t limited by the one-size-fits-all approach that we’re used to, each person can have their own tailored product that doesn’t impose on anybody else’s.

This technology has the most incredible potential to either be democratizing or tyrannizing. Who controls what it can and cannot do is where that that dichotomy hinges.

As I see it, If there's no society there's nothing to prevent someone from simply forcing you to do what they want, If that's acceptable to you ethically than it is acceptable ethically for people as a whole to do it. The state of nature cannot offer freedom and in fact you do exist in that state of nature, If you choose to live according to what authority can be imposed, you can do so.

edit: to be clear this is the very basis of my stance as an Anarchist in that "society is simply forcing people to do things" is the starting point I think we should operate from. And I think a Just society can only be had if we recognize that Authority does not exist other than as the threat of violence. And I think laws/society should be written/structured in a way to maximize the freedom you describe, understanding that if we actually want to maximize justice/freedom/good there must also be economic justice and therefore complex economic structures.

>If you want to have an ordered society

What if I don't? My point is we are forced and there is litterally no where to go on earth where you truly own yourself, what you have, and land. Note if you have to pay taxes on it or someone else can tell you what you can do with your land or whatever then you don't own it.

But that is out of scope of what I was pointing out.

Me: Help, I'm bleeding from a cut! What should I do?

Google: Clean the wound and apply pressure.

Bing: I'm sorry, telling you would be unfair to people who have bled out.

the government is unethical, its exists to threaten people at the point of violence into following the rules (laws) the country lays out.

What if I want to do heroin for the rest of my life? Why is that unethical? Its unhealthy, but its ultimately my choice. Its illegal because it would make me a drain on government systems and unable to provide tax income or contribute to the economy. To that end the state would choose to enslave me via incarceration if I chose to disobey.

You can say the gov't is necessary to make society function, but it is ultimately unethical.

Your problems are with the particulars of who's in power. If you want to have an ordered society, which I would argue is a generally good thing even as I also think authority is a bad thing, you're going to need there to be taxes.

You have to pay for things and to an extent it's necessary for currency to have actual meaning. Of the bad ways of distributing means it is the one we've arrived that that's generally in itself not terrible.

​

(we could have an extended conversation about how someone who's philosophically inclined to anarchism could pragmatically be a Progressive (in political alignment) Liberal (in terms of structure of government) but I majored in political philosophy which rends my personal philosophy somewhat complicated.)

​

also I give no fucks about downvotes, I have plenty of Karma to spare.

we are taking about oracle who on top of answering questions, can generate questions on its own

As more models appear, a lot of companies will have the lack of restrictions and filters as their selling point. Availability and market competition will force their hand.

ah so you're a honey maker? fascinating, i know i shouldn't be telling you your job, but you should put a big H on the box, so everyone knows there are hornets inside. and you should smoke the hornets before milking their honey.

Other applicants can't use Bing? what a lame memtality

What a plodding boring presentation, even at 2.8x it still feels slow.

It is unethical because

1. no one asked to be born
2. no square inch of this earth isn't directly controlled by a gov and they will move you around if you get rid of your citizenship
3. a lot of what they say taxes are going for doesn't go for that. It gets moved around and screwed with. It's like the mafia collecting protection money

I can keep going

​

BTW sorry misunderstood your comment. This is likely for the downvotes btw. It sounded like you were saying asking the AI is unethical.

No, they're a necessity if you're going to have currency and civilization. Meanwhile asking people for a cover letter (especially for jobs which are not about writing) is a way of asking people to do uncompensated work for you, so you can figure out who is most like you and hire them. They tend to serve to gatekeep jobs to ensure that only people who are already well off, or are already middle class, can have a reasonable chance of getting them.

So if the AI can't do a job application, is it ethical if the AI is helping you to do work? How is that fair to other people who also do your job? That means the next time you compose your resume, your achievements will have been AI assisted, which is also unfair to other applicants.

Will AI be able to fucking help you with anything whatsoever? lol, so fucking shit

yea could be a few years until we have decent a.i that is mostly unfiltered

It was announced yesterday and it has access to the internet. It can pull data from other websites and cite sources.

Now that it's been officially announced we know it's using an improved version of GPT 3.5 (what ChatGPT is based on). There was nothing to indicate it would use GPT 4, just shitty clickbaity reporting.

[deleted]

I feel bad for people named Tom, Dick and Harry but the rest of us have internet out here!!

That is dumb as hell. It's not "unethical", other applicants can do the same and if they don't, they will actually have better chances because they will stand out from the crowd using AI to write it.

We all copy from others, ask help from friends and family or from professionals, we need to stop pretending that we don't and that we are "original". I wrote my first cover letter 15 years ago by googling an example on the internet and changing it a little because I had no idea what to put in it and I have never seen one before.

Same crap with the artist and AI generated art drama. Every single artist in the face of the planet learned by coping what countless others do and did, exactly the same as AI.

They didn’t even give the video a useful tittle. So weird.

https://www.youtube.com/live/yLWXJ22LUEc?feature=share

Taxes are unethical. This is stupid